
Time travel sounds like fun unless you’re talking about retirement accounts. With our 401(k), 403(b), and IRA balances back to where they were in 2003, lots of us are wondering how we can ever catch up.
Employer-sponsored retirement plans lost an average of 19.1 percent of their value, or $573 billion, last year, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Fidelity recently reported that its average 401(k) participant lost 27 percent, down to $50,200 from $69,200.
Meanwhile, numerous big companies, including General Motors, Kodak, Motorola, UPS, and Wynn Resorts, have suspended their 401(k) matching contributions, which make these tax-deferred accounts so attractive to employees. Benefit-consulting firms are reporting closures of 401(k) plans among some smaller employers, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Regardless of your age, the blow to your savings calls for a reassessment. Should you keep contributing to your 401(k) without an employer match? What if your employer pays the match in company stock? How much money should go into an IRA instead? Is it worth contributing more to an account that could decline further? Below, we offer some common problems and potential solutions.
Many employers match as much as 3 percent of workers’ 401(k) contributions, or 50 cents per dollar, on up to 6 percent of gross pay. If that goes away, some financial advisers say, there’s not much incentive to keep investing in your company’s plan.
Matt Conrad, a CPA and managing director of Complete Wealth Management in Mission Viejo, Calif., notes that 401(k) plans don’t provide the range of investments that you could get with an IRA. And 401(k) investments, particularly those in small to midsized plans, can have high expense ratios—fund-speak for management fees—that eat into returns.
Instead, Conrad suggests investing outside your company’s retirement plan, first in a Roth IRA—if your income qualifies you—and then in your 401(k). You’re entitled to contribute up to $5,000 in a Roth, plus another $1,000 if you’re 50 or over (see How long will it take?). A Roth IRA is funded with after-tax income, but your gains and withdrawals are tax-free. “Long term, the tax benefits are greater with a Roth,” Conrad says.
But not everyone agrees with Conrad’s strategy. Other advisers say that even without the match, 401(k) plans are still worthy of your contributions up to the maximum allowable: $16,500 for 2009, plus another $5,500 if you’re 50 or older. If you can, make up for that missing match by replacing it with your own money. “If you’re lucky enough to get a raise, dump as much of that as you can into the 401(k),” says Michael Kresh, a certified financial planner and principal of M.D. Kresh Financial Services in Islandia, N.Y.
Higher-paid workers might have no choice but to stick with a 401(k), which unlike a Roth IRA has no income ceiling. Lower-paid workers, whose tax rates are less than the maximum—say, 15 percent vs. 35 percent—might benefit more from putting after-tax money directly into a Roth IRA, because the deductibility of 401(k) contributions is a smaller tax break than the free tax ride a Roth offers. But if your tax and income situation allows you to go either way, consider these factors:
If your balance is less than $5,000, your old employer doesn’t have to maintain your account in its 401(k) plan, so you’ll probably have no choice but to cash it out or roll it over into an IRA. If your account is larger than that, your decision should hinge on the quality of the plan.
If you’re moving to a new job, you might be able to roll your money directly into that company’s plan. Once again, compare the costs and investment options of the two plans.
Should you decide to roll over your 401(k) money, arrange to have it sent to the investment company handling the account, not to yourself.
If your adjusted gross income is $100,000 or less, you can make a direct rollover from a 401(k) or 403(b) plan to a Roth IRA. If you do so, though, you’ll have to pay ordinary income tax on any of the money that has not yet been taxed.
This is still uncommon but can happen. The good news is that all your holdings become 100 percent vested, meaning that you’re entitled to the full amount that your company has contributed on your behalf. But you must roll over your account within the prescribed 60-day period to avoid paying income tax on the distribution and, if you’re 59½ or younger, to avoid a penalty.
A match in company stock—a common practice—often isn’t ideal, but it’s better than no employer match. Investing a substantial portion of your wealth in the same place you work is always risky—just ask former Enron employees, who lost their jobs and their shirts when the company foundered. In the past, company stock was the only option for many 401(k) participants. But after the Enron debacle, the IRS ruled that employees can trade out of their company stock after three years. Some employers let you do it sooner.
If you have a long time horizon—five years or more—you should stay invested and continue to contribute to your stock holdings. For one thing, locking in losses by selling now isn’t wise. For another, stocks are at a significant discount and may never be so cheap again. “We’ve got a 50 percent sale in stocks going on,” notes Richard S. Kahler, a fee-only financial planner in Rapid City, S.D.
And while no one knows when a turnaround might occur, Dalbar, an investment research company, has found that major market rises tend to happen within just a few days, before most investors have time to react. If you don’t want to miss out, it’s best to stay invested.
If your allocation between stocks and bonds was based on your age, tolerance for risk, and time until retirement, stick to those parameters. Ostensibly, your initial allocation was based on a plan that’s worth continuing. Rebalance by selling holdings that have gone beyond the percentage where they should be and buying more of what’s shrunk in your portfolio.
If, however, you’ve discovered your tolerance for risk is not as great as you thought, you might have to change your allocation to reflect that. Keep in mind that less risk in your portfolio might mean lower returns over time. So you might need to work longer and contribute more each year to get back to that future you’d envisioned in 2003.
This article appeared in the April 2009 issue of Consumer Reports Money Adviser.